The Police Are Getting Younger.

[jambutty]

We golden oldies or even middle aged people have often observed that the police seem to be getting younger with each passing year. Well now a 21 years old will be able to say the same.

Thames Valley Police have recruited two 16 year olds as Community Support Officers. Presumably after training they will be out on the streets doing their thing, although I suspect that they will be accompanied by an older and more experienced Community Support Officer.

Where’s Tealeaf when we need a sharp “crackpot idea”.

Whilst it is a good thing to have youngsters joining the police force, 16 is too young to be let out of the police station on active duty, accompanied or not.

The argument put forward by the pro people is that a teenager can join the armed forces at 16 so why not the police. My counter point is that yes teenagers can join the armed forces at 16 but they do not get sent for “ACTIVE” service until they reach 18.

[kathleen_firth]

i know what u mean
a 16 year old will get laugh at

[beechy]

its better than walking the streets

[davo69]

good thing it gives them two years to learn before going out on there own

[slinky]

I think it's a good thing. We moan when young people are WASTERS and we moan when they are too YOUNG to do a job they want to do!!!

I say good on them for choosing the path they wish to go down so early on in life. Beating crime has got to be better for them than making it IMO

I would be very proud if this was one of my lads

[shakermaker]

Originally Posted by jambutty

Thames Valley Police have recruited two 16 year olds as Community Support Officers.

They're not Police officers then are they.
They're not going to be battling drunks on Friday nights or tackling footy hooligans on a Saturday.
I'd agree with you that 16 is too young to become a bobby on the beat but for a community support officer that is present in order to be in touch with the community, it is a good idea to have a 16 year old in this position, as young people in communities need role models who they can relate to.

[accymel]

Community support officer position is a good start to many jobs for experience certainly in line of policing work or security work. It makes a change that some youths want to do something more constructive with their time & maybe cos of their youth they can appeal to the better nature of the young hoolies on their age level.

[SPUGGIE J]

Originally Posted by accymel

Community support officer position is a good start to many jobs for experience certainly in line of policing work or security work. It makes a change that some youths want to do something more constructive with their time & maybe cos of their youth they can appeal to the better nature of the young hoolies on their age level.

Not much chance of that Mel they will be seen as the enemy for being at the police officers side. If you do not conform to what the teens want you are ostracized and become a target.

[BERNADETTE]

Originally Posted by SPUGGIE J

Not much chance of that Mel they will be seen as the enemy for being at the police officers side. If you do not conform to what the teens want you are ostracized and become a target.

That is so true, it is about time something was done to stop these hoolies from terrorising decent people.

[accymel]

Originally Posted by SPUGGIE J

Not much chance of that Mel they will be seen as the enemy for being at the police officers side. If you do not conform to what the teens want you are ostracized and become a target.

Not necessarily so depending on what type of teens are being actioned, like they give a toss how old someone is in uniform!! Even older people are targets, so dont think age comes into it there, some thugs dont conform to any authority, but a younger person may have influence however small to those especially starting in their crime life early there is hope.

[SPUGGIE J]

Originally Posted by accymel

Not necessarily so depending on what type of teens are being actioned, like they give a toss how old someone is in uniform!! Even older people are targets, so dont think age comes into it there, some thugs dont conform to any authority, but a younger person may have influence however small to those especially starting in their crime life early there is hope.

Will have to agree to disagree on this one Mel. I can only go on the attitude of the younger end up here and not that down there. Maybe its be the slight difference in attitudes between S n E.

[Mr Aleks]

Jambuttie your wrong sorry. You can join up at 15yrs and 9 month and you can be sent on active duty at any time but it does not count until your 18. I should know trust me.

[jambutty]

Originally Posted by Aleks

Jambuttie your wrong sorry. You can join up at 15yrs and 9 month and you can be sent on active duty at any time but it does not count until your 18. I should know trust me.

Do get my name right Aleks – it’s jambutty.

Maybe my phrase of ‘active duty’ was not the right one. What I meant was sent to fight, which I accept is different to active duty. Any serviceman on the completion of the initial training is on active duty thereafter. Armed forces under the age of 18 are not sent into a situation where they could get killed by enemy fire.

So what you are saying is that because a person is under 18 it doesn’t count if he is killed? What do they do? Bring him back to life and wait for his 18th birthday?

I think that you are getting ‘man’s’ time and ‘boy’ time mixed up with fighting time. Any serviceman or woman who joins up for a set period of time aged younger than 18, their ‘time’ does not start until their 18th birthday. I joined the Royal Navy aged 16 years, 11 months, 3 weeks and 2 days for a 12 years engagement. My 12 years did not start until my 18th birthday. Yet at 17 I was on active duty at Kranji Wireless in Singapore. But then it wasn’t a war zone.

During the Falklands conflict and the Middle East debacle any sailor under the age of 18 was drafted off the ships that went to the south Atlantic or Persian Gulf before they set sail. Much to the chagrin of some of them but not their parents.

It was the same with soldiers. Under 18’s did not ship out with their regiment. Likewise with the RAF and certainly the Marines.

Maybe the modern forces have changed but somehow I doubt it. Public opinion would not allow minors into a war zone.

Why should I trust you? I don’t know you.

[Cheekymonkey]

Originally Posted by jambutty

Do get my name right Aleks – it’s jambutty.

Maybe my phrase of ‘active duty’ was not the right one. What I meant was sent to fight, which I accept is different to active duty. Any serviceman on the completion of the initial training is on active duty thereafter. Armed forces under the age of 18 are not sent into a situation where they could get killed by enemy fire.

So what you are saying is that because a person is under 18 it doesn’t count if he is killed? What do they do? Bring him back to life and wait for his 18th birthday?

I think that you are getting ‘man’s’ time and ‘boy’ time mixed up with fighting time. Any serviceman or woman who joins up for a set period of time aged younger than 18, their ‘time’ does not start until their 18th birthday. I joined the Royal Navy aged 16 years, 11 months, 3 weeks and 2 days for a 12 years engagement. My 12 years did not start until my 18th birthday. Yet at 17 I was on active duty at Kranji Wireless in Singapore. But then it wasn’t a war zone.

During the Falklands conflict and the Middle East debacle any sailor under the age of 18 was drafted off the ships that went to the south Atlantic or Persian Gulf before they set sail. Much to the chagrin of some of them but not their parents.

It was the same with soldiers. Under 18’s did not ship out with their regiment. Likewise with the RAF and certainly the Marines.

Maybe the modern forces have changed but somehow I doubt it. Public opinion would not allow minors into a war zone.

Why should I trust you? I don’t know you.

or if you cant spell jambutty aleks...cobra will do....Ray